Evaluation of cellular phone technology with digital hearing aid features: Effects of encoding and individualized amplification

Journal of the American Academy of Audiology

Volumn 20, Issue 2, 2009, Pages 109-118

  Mackersie, Carol L ^a   Qi, Yingyong ^a,b   Boothroyd, Arthur ^a   Conrad, Nicole ^a  

^a SAN DIEGO STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b SHANDONG UNIVERSITY   (China)

Author keywords

Amplifiers; Cellular phone; Hearing aids; Hearing loss; Speech perception

Indexed keywords

ADULT; AGED; AMPLIFIER; ARTICLE; AUDITORY STIMULATION; AUDITORY THRESHOLD; BIOMEDICAL TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL ARTICLE; COMPUTER SIMULATION; HEARING; HEARING AID; HUMAN; LOUDNESS; MICROPHONE; MOBILE PHONE; MULTICHANNEL AMPLIFICATION; NOISE; PERCEPTION DEAFNESS; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SIGNAL PROCESSING; SPEECH DISCRIMINATION; STIMULUS RESPONSE;

AGED; AGED, 80 AND OVER; CELLULAR PHONE; HEARING AIDS; HEARING LOSS, SENSORINEURAL; HUMANS; MIDDLE AGED; SPEECH PERCEPTION;

EID: 69249102605     PISSN: 10500545     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3766/jaaa.20.2.4     Document Type: Article

References (15)

1. Boothroyd A, Hnath-Chisolm T, Hanin L, Kishon-Rabin L. (1988) Voice fundamental frequency as an auditory supplement to the speechreading of sentences. Ear Hear 9:306-312.
2. Byrne D. (1996) Hearing aid selection for the 1990s: where to? J Am Acad Audiol 7:377-395.
3. Byrne C, Cotton S. (1988) Evaluation of the National Acoustic Laboratories' new hearing aid selection procedure. J Speech Hear Res 31:178-186.
4. Byrne D, Dillion H, Ching T, Katsch R, Keidser G. (2001)NAL-NL1 procedure for fitting nonlinear hearing aids: Characteristics and comparisons with other procedures. J Am Acad Audiol 12:37-51.
5. Cox RM, Gray G. (2001) Verifying loudness perception after hearing aid fitting. Am J Audiol 10:91-98.
6. Greenhouse SW, Geisser S. (1959) On methods in the analysis of profile data. Psychometrika 24:95-112.
7. Hawkins DB, Walden BE, Prosek RA. (1987) Description and validation of an LDL procedure designed to select SSPL90. Ear Hear 8:162-169.
8. Kochkin S. (2000) Marke Trak V. Why my hearing aids are in the drawer: the consumer's perspective. Hear J 53:34-42.
9. Kochkin S. (2007) Marke Trak VII: obstacles to adult non-user adoption of hearing aids. Hear J 60:24-50.
10. Mackersie CL, Boothroyd A, Minniear D. (2001) Evaluation of a computer-assisted speech perception assessment test (CASPA). J Am Acad Audiol 13:38-49.
11. Mackersie CL, Crocker TL, Davis RA. (2004) Limiting high-frequency hearing aid gain in listeners with and without suspected cochlear dead regions. J Am Acad Audiol 15:498-507.
12. Preminger JE, Van Tasell DJ. (1995) Measurement of speech quality as a tool to optimize the fitting of a hearing aid. J Speech Hear Res 38:726-736.
13. Skinner MW, Karstaedt MM, Miller JD. (1982) Amplification bandwidth and intelligibility of speech in quiet and noise for listeners with sensorineural hearing loss. Audiol 21:251-268.
14. Studebaker GA. (1985) A "rationalized" arcsine transform. J Speech Hear Res 28:455-462.
15. Studebaker GA. (1992) The effect of equating loudness on audibility-based hearing aid selection. J Am Acad Audiol 3: 113-118.